Hopes for D&D 5.0

[Czin]

Like 3.5, not balanced around removing the option of cheese but being clear in what spells and other stuff can do. Making the cheese more obvious and stretchy of the rules makes it easier to identify and say no to. More useful feats (especially for fighters). More psionics. SO MUCH MORE. Entire books dedicated to simply the lore of how psionics works with little or no crunch. Stuff like that.

Maybe Psionics could be made into core and get updates with every splatbook like divine and arcane magic?

[MeeposFire]

Agreed, I like AD&D and 3.X for the fact that in those systems, Monsters and Players had the same stat systems whereas 4.0 gave them separate stat systems (though looking at my only two 4e splatbooks, Monster stats appear to be comfortingly similar to 3.X's, so I suspect that 4e's player character design must be radically different than what I'm used to) for some reason I never understood.

WotC seems to go with the mantra of making new splatbooks (or sub-systems, see D20 modern and future) whenever the demand for other playstyles rises. Though I'm guessing that you're in the "everything I need should be in Core or in the SRD" crowd.

Monsters did not have the same stats or abilities in 1e and 2e. Most monsters had no stats outside of a intelligence range. Further monsters did not get con bonuses to HP in general, had their own thac0 table, had their own rules (halflings as monsters could wear leather over their chainmail for AC4 yet PCs cannot), monsters continue to gain HD at unlimited rate yet PCs in 2nd ed are limited to 9 or 10. The list goes on. 4e is actually closer in this regard.

[WitchSlayer]

Keep 4e defenses (AC, reflex, fortitude and will all being things the attacker has to meet)

Keep 4e "path" things, themes, paragon path and epic destiny.

[Khatoblepas]

On the one hand, I would like D&D to be 3.5 Psionics+Tome of Battle-like, with a couple of changes:
- AD&D HP. (Dice rolls for HP stop at level 10)
- A better skill system. Maybe something percentile based like 2e had.
- Initiative docking casting (maybe 1 Initiative per 2 PP spent?) and better handled initiative altogether.
- Different XP values for different classes (slow for Psionics, medium for ToB and PsyWar, fast for Tier 4 classes if there are any), and dual classing as standard. Because hey, as much as I like 3e's multiclassing, I much prefer getting abilities without having to spend geometrically more XP on it. You still only have one set of actions per round.
- No trap/tax feats. The tail end of 3.5 was pretty good for this. There was more "All of these are good options" and less "That is weaksauce, noone would take that."
- MONSTERS IDENTICALLY BUILT AS PCS. I want to know that the HD of Monster X is worth X levels in a class. Even if it's a puzzle monster. I want to know how to play a Mimic in a party, what class breakdown it has (to weaken the monster down to level 1) without missing out on vital HD. Level Adjustment was a step in the right direction, but all of the HD need to count. If I want to play a Beholder, I want to play a Beholder from level 1. Bring on the monster classes! Woo! With all classes being within the Tier 3 range, monsters become easier to gauge.

But then again, I have found my D&D 5th Edition in BRP Classic Fantasy. It's skill based, with class archetypes and is just the right amount of gritty! BRP also stats monsters identically to PCs. So all of my complaints melt away in the face of it, and I play that.

[Yahzi]

I wish D&D 5.0 would be exactly like GURPS. Only as popular as D&D.

[MeeposFire]

Monsters working exactly PCs works okay as a player but it is a terrible burden on DMs. Making decent npcs (not counting the roleplaying part which i mostly divorced from mechanics) takes a lot more time in 3e than it did in any previous version of D&D and even 4e. Equipment is more of a problem as well. Any race you want to be could be created, if desired, in a monsters are different paradigm since we can keep things that are two nasty for PCs but are good for monsters separate thus increasing design space for new monster PCs.

[Czin]

Monsters working exactly PCs works okay as a player but it is a terrible burden on DMs. Making decent npcs (not counting the roleplaying part which i mostly divorced from mechanics) takes a lot more time in 3e than it did in any previous version of D&D and even 4e. Equipment is more of a problem as well. Any race you want to be could be created, if desired, in a monsters are different paradigm since we can keep things that are two nasty for PCs but are good for monsters separate thus increasing design space for new monster PCs.

I can make stats for an Npc in minutes all it takes for most stats is some skill in arithmetic, the only parts that take much time at all are feat picking and skill assignment (the former more so than the latter.) I have a handy little PDF my old DM compiled of every magic item from every 3.X splatbook and another PDF for ever magic item trait (flame, flaming burst.)

Maybe it's just my familiarity with 3.5 (even if the sheer amount of homebrew and house rules I use make the system I use the bastard offspring of 3.5 and Dark Heresy) and ability in arithmetic but I never found statting out balanced NPCs to be very lengthy or hard.

Making a story for said NPC takes similarly low amounts of time for me, but that's just because I can just snatch a background story's "skeleton" from the many ideas floating in my head at any given time and plug in the details.

But if DMing really is getting to hard for you, I cannot reccomend the usage of Co-dms or DM assistants enough. I don't know how I'd manage without my four Co-DMs.

[MeeposFire]

You have a PDF with every item ever made and every item trait just so you can make stock NPCs? That is sort of proving my point. Besides I can relate the stories of many DMs taking painful amounts of time to create a single NPC and then when they die there items causing problems with expected treasure gains.

Monsters having seperate stats mean I can always design a monster with stats that are exactly the challenge I want without having to worry about treasure or looking through stacks of books or in your case PDFs. What do you think takes longer to make an orc general made with 6+ splat books or an orc general using just 1 book? And in that one book case the monster is still a challenge. In 3.5 you had to crawl through books (or make a spellcaster) to make challenging npcs.

[Thurbane]

Monsters did not have the same stats or abilities in 1e and 2e. Most monsters had no stats outside of a intelligence range. Further monsters did not get con bonuses to HP in general, had their own thac0 table, had their own rules (halflings as monsters could wear leather over their chainmail for AC4 yet PCs cannot), monsters continue to gain HD at unlimited rate yet PCs in 2nd ed are limited to 9 or 10. The list goes on. 4e is actually closer in this regard.
That was one of the things I enjoyed most about 3.5, when I started playing it (my progression was AD&D 1E/basic, 2E and 3.5 - I skipped 3.0). Monsters finally had ability scores! And even for all of it's brokenness, the thought of being able to play monsters as characters was just awesome!

[MeeposFire]

That was one of the things I enjoyed most about 3.5, when I started playing it (my progression was AD&D 1E/basic, 2E and 3.5 - I skipped 3.0). Monsters finally had ability scores! And even for all of it's brokenness, the thought of being able to play monsters as characters was just awesome!

Oh I enjoyed it at first too. But when I left it and came back I realized that as a player I did not notice what the enemy used, as a DM I found monsters were easier with their own rules, and as a player playing a monster I could fairly easily make a monster race to use in the game.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Honestly, I'm among the "tiring of D&D" crowd, now that I've branched out into other systems like WoD, Mouse Guard, and examining the Pendragon RPG. I doubt I'd take too many looks at D&D 5.0, unless it offered something really interesting.

[Czin]

You have a PDF with every item ever made and every item trait just so you can make stock NPCs? That is sort of proving my point. Besides I can relate the stories of many DMs taking painful amounts of time to create a single NPC and then when they die there items causing problems with expected treasure gains.

Monsters having seperate stats mean I can always design a monster with stats that are exactly the challenge I want without having to worry about treasure or looking through stacks of books or in your case PDFs. What do you think takes longer to make an orc general made with 6+ splat books or an orc general using just 1 book? And in that one book case the monster is still a challenge. In 3.5 you had to crawl through books (or make a spellcaster) to make challenging npcs.

I didn't make it, my old DM did; he was born and raised on soviet era communist "work hard and selflessly for good of the people and the motherland" propaganda (he came from the Red side of the Iron Curtain obviously) so he had something of an inhuman work ethic. It's a shame he died in a car accident on April 13th, 2010; he'd probably perform better as the Ace of Spades DM (highest rank for our co-dm heirarchy) and manage the Zarvhax campaign setting (his creation, a very intricate and complicated setting so well detailed that it makes Faerun look downright incomplete) better than I could.

[MeeposFire]

Honestly, I'm among the "tiring of D&D" crowd, now that I've branched out into other systems like WoD, Mouse Guard, and examining the Pendragon RPG. I doubt I'd take too many looks at D&D 5.0, unless it offered something really interesting.

This is a difficult problem. Change a lot (or be perceived as changing a lot) then you may lose people who dislike changes and if you do not change stuff then people may get bored with the game design.

[Dimers]

Those are nonlethal injuries ... healing surges say that "nope, you can instantaneously heal these fatal wounds without any help from anyone else."

The existence of the warlord in PHB1 forced me to try to justify nonmagical healing surges. I come up short, but one real-world fact and one trope help me somewhat. First, shock is a substantial part of the problem for almost any injury, which means helping someone get past it mentally can effectively cure some HP damage. Second, many -- perhaps even most -- heroes in fiction grit their teeth and fight past the pain, giving their best despite copious bleeding, and I want that to be true whether or not it is. I'm not comfortable with the healing surges mechanic, but I can accept it.


Speaking about first and second edition: was anyone ever bothered by the lack of options in character customization back then?

Immensely. I like to match up character history with current abilities, and there just weren't enough abilities offered in combinations that the rules would let me take. Character creation in 3.X was a blast for me.

[MeeposFire]

The existence of the warlord in PHB1 forced me to try to justify nonmagical healing surges. I come up short, but one real-world fact and one trope help me somewhat. First, shock is a substantial part of the problem for almost any injury, which means helping someone get past it mentally can effectively cure some HP damage. Second, many -- perhaps even most -- heroes in fiction grit their teeth and fight past the pain, giving their best despite copious bleeding, and I want that to be true whether or not it is. I'm not comfortable with the healing surges mechanic, but I can accept it.



Immensely. I like to match up character history with current abilities, and there just weren't enough abilities offered in combinations that the rules would let me take. Character creation in 3.X was a blast for me.

It also helps when you realize that HP does not represent just physical damage and in fact physical damage is a very small part of it (though even I find myself liking to describe things as physical damage anyway since it sounds more awesome).

It also helps if you think of healing surge as your hp that you do not have access to all the time. Hence why it is a second wind.

The issue of healing surges is a continuation of the problem many people have with hit points in general when they really start thinking in depth about the whole thing. I mean somehow you get hit for a hundred damage in 3e from falling off a 500 foot cliff (or whatever) and you only have 1hp left and you are perfectly fine the rest of the day? Obviously hp is not a basis for realism in the first place.

[jseah]

The issue of healing surges is a continuation of the problem many people have with hit points in general when they really start thinking in depth about the whole thing.
Oh, good point.
One more thing for 5.0 to fix.

8. Realistic hp
Hp = actual physical damage.
Anything that possibly results from that, changes. Yes, you can have loads of hp, but falling off a cliff means you take something like (ft fallen/10) d20 % of your max hp. Or perhaps some other distribution to make things line up better.

If effects feel like they should ignore hp but still wound people, make it deal % of max hp instead and problem solved.

[MeeposFire]

If you want real you do not use hp.

you use a hit system that designates where you were hit and then decide how bad.

For instance you are hit by a two handed sword in the shoulder once. It cleaves through your chest and you die.

There you go. For me I will take my "unrealistic" and have actual fun with a character that will last a long time and not just die like you would in real life considering I am playing a game whee I do not want to have real life.

[jseah]

Meh, more truth smacks me in the face.

Hp is a very simplified model. The amount of work you save by tracking only one number is not saved when you have to correct for all the weirdness that occurs.

Modified 8. Realistic combat system
Trauma and wounds to various locations impose status effects. Weapon hit tables (likelyhood of hitting various places).
Monster biology as well too! Monsters might not have arms, or even a body. Their hit locations change.

[MeeposFire]

More power to you, I rather stick with a simpler system with a level of abstraction personally:smallsmile:.

[Nero24200]

If you want real you do not use hp.

you use a hit system that designates where you were hit and then decide how bad.

For instance you are hit by a two handed sword in the shoulder once. It cleaves through your chest and you die.

There you go. For me I will take my "unrealistic" and have actual fun with a character that will last a long time and not just die like you would in real life considering I am playing a game whee I do not want to have real life.

Realistic =/= gritty. The Wounds/Vitality points system from the SRD is, if anything, more realistic than the standard HP system, yet if anything you're harder to kill with that variation due to having an extra buffer before going to negatives. I

n that version, Vitality points measure endurence and only losing wound points represent taking actual damage. The number of wound points you have don't go up (unless you find ways to boost Con).

[MeeposFire]

So how is it more real? You get run through by a large spear. Are you still alive more often than not? If so it is not realistic.

[Nero24200]

So how is it more real? You get run through by a large spear. Are you still alive more often than not? If so it is not realistic.

Well no actually. The system works so that, if you actually get run through you're screwed. As I said, losing vitality points doesn't represent taking actual hits, only losing wound points does that. The loss of 1 wound point is enough to hamper you.

[MeeposFire]

Well no actually. The system works so that, if you actually get run through you're screwed. As I said, losing vitality points doesn't represent taking actual hits, only losing wound points does that. The loss of 1 wound point is enough to hamper you.

Ah so it takes apart hitpoints which represented near misses, weariness, luck, flagging spirits, other forms of defeat, and physical hits and separates them. Makes sense though once again it makes the game more complicated and slower. Heck saga edition star wars got rid of that system for that very reason. I doubt any future version of D&D will go to that as a standard rule.

[Thurbane]

How "real" hit points are has been a point of debate since 1E. :smallamused:

[MeeposFire]

How "real" hit points are has been a point of debate since 1E. :smallamused:

It never ends does it:smalltongue::smallsmile:.

[Zaydos]

Yeah wound points can be nice but complicate things.

Also when I start having to roll to see what part of the beholder I hit give me a different game... oh wait (checks his 2e Monster Manual)... apparently I don't mind.

Seriously, though, I'm glad D&D isn't that realistic. If I want a game which is realistic in how it handles damage I'll play something that isn't a model for epic fantasy.

If I want something about heroes who grapple a living desk made from glue, or rip the arms off of a troll, or just to have a simple fun time then I will throw down a D&D rulebook and play.

And that's what I want from 5e. A game that I can just sit down and play. A game where, given time, I can make a 100 page thing detailing the gods of my world, with another 100 pages of new rules (feats and PrCs for 3.X... haven't done that for the others) that I made, and a 5 page myth about how the various outsider races were created. A game which I can use to create a world of high fantasy.

Every edition has had those things. Except maybe OD&D, I've never played that, okay I can't vouch for Pathfinder either (haven't played it), or Hackmaster (again haven't played it), or any of the retro-clones; but unless they seriously messed something up I can't see how they couldn't.

I want classes, and I want epic fantasy from D&D partially because it's always had them and partially because most everything else doesn't. If D&D stopped having those the total options for RPGs would decrease and this would sadden me.

[MeeposFire]

Yeah wound points can be nice but complicate things.

Also when I start having to roll to see what part of the beholder I hit give me a different game... oh wait (checks his 2e Monster Manual)... apparently I don't mind.

Seriously, though, I'm glad D&D isn't that realistic. If I want a game which is realistic in how it handles damage I'll play something that isn't a model for epic fantasy.

If I want something about heroes who grapple a living desk made from glue, or rip the arms off of a troll, or just to have a simple fun time then I will throw down a D&D rulebook and play.

And that's what I want from 5e. A game that I can just sit down and play. A game where, given time, I can make a 100 page thing detailing the gods of my world, with another 100 pages of new rules (feats and PrCs for 3.X... haven't done that for the others) that I made, and a 5 page myth about how the various outsider races were created. A game which I can use to create a world of high fantasy.

Every edition has had those things. Except maybe OD&D, I've never played that, okay I can't vouch for Pathfinder either (haven't played it), or Hackmaster (again haven't played it), or any of the retro-clones; but unless they seriously messed something up I can't see how they couldn't.

I want classes, and I want epic fantasy from D&D partially because it's always had them and partially because most everything else doesn't. If D&D stopped having those the total options for RPGs would decrease and this would sadden me.

I agree in many ways with the above:smallwink:.

[Czin]

5e's tarrasque must be able to breathe fire...why you ask? To render the horse/flying archers that are typically capable of rather easily beating it vulnerable to the beast.

[Dimers]

Modified 8. Realistic combat system
Trauma and wounds to various locations impose status effects. Weapon hit tables (likelyhood of hitting various places).
Monster biology as well too! Monsters might not have arms, or even a body. Their hit locations change.

These are more great examples of why 5e should come bundled with computer programs. One aspect tracks each character's wounds in various areas, summarizing the crunch for the player and GM. One aspect has hit-location tables, which ties in to possible crit effects. And so on. Sooooo much easier to have a computer do all that.

[Zaydos]

These are more great examples of why 5e should come bundled with computer programs. One aspect tracks each character's wounds in various areas, summarizing the crunch for the player and GM. One aspect has hit-location tables, which ties in to possible crit effects. And so on. Sooooo much easier to have a computer do all that.

When Pen and Paper RPGs require a computer will be a sad day. I have no problem with using one; I don't carry my hard copy books with me anymore... I lost too many bags that way, I make all my anything on MS word, and I've even used electronic dice before (not satisfying), but... I don't like feeling I have to use my computer.

[Eldan]

Aye. I've played D&D on the train, in a park, and while walking through the city (without Dice, took some improvisation). Having a computer required would be very limiting.

[Frozen_Feet]

I like the hitpoint system. It's easy enough to work in PnP environment and abstract enough to allow for many different types of description.

I've always viewed HP to work this way: damage represents actual force of the blow, but the same force does not cause same effects in all things. A blow that shreds paper leaves hardly a scratch in metal, after all. To a Fighter with 100 HP, 10 points of damage is the same as 1 point of damage is to a Fighter with 10 HP, while 10 HP is life-threatening to the latter and 1 point is merely a scratch to the former.

Best HP systems in my experience have been those that add some form of "wound levels" to it. The "Vitality point" variant is the simplest form of this, with two levels; CODA system has four or more depending on the character, and going down a level incurs penalties that make action and avoiding further injury more difficult.

In fact, if I were to add something to D&D wound modelling, it'd be simple Wound and Fatigue level system like that. Exact hit location have always been cumbersome in my opinion.

[jseah]

^Maybe not require a computer.

Perhaps, built into the system, is an understanding that the rules are there to model something.

HP is an abstraction of damage. Wounds and Vitality is a better abstraction. Trauma, limb damage and bleeding is bordering on a weak simulation.

So, various levels of rules are given, and you can use any. But the GM and players are expected to understand that the rules are just that, models, and are expected to bend them in favour of the more complex one when required to.

Resources permitting of course. A PbP session might decide to run wounds and vitality as the default setting but switch to trauma and limb damage when called shots are made.
Tabletops are considerably more restricted, so HP as default, swapping to wounds/vit. when the situation calls for it (eg. hitting tied up people)

[Fox Box Socks]

I think that if you're hoping that D&D moves away from dependence on magic items, Hit Points, and a class-based system, you're hoping in vain. These are things that are iconic to Dungeons and Dragons at this point. Even people who don't play D&D know what Hit Points and +1 Swords and Wizards are.

[The Rose Dragon]

I think that if you're hoping that D&D moves away from dependence on magic items, Hit Points, and a class-based system, you're hoping in vain. These are things that are iconic to Dungeons and Dragons at this point. Even people who don't play D&D know what Hit Points and +1 Swords and Wizards are.

They know what wizards and hit points are because wizard is a word used before D&D, if I recall correctly, and hit points exist in other systems as well.

Though the +1 sword thing, I'll give you.

[Sine]

5e's tarrasque must be able to breathe fire...why you ask? To render the horse/flying archers that are typically capable of rather easily beating it vulnerable to the beast.
Wouldn't work; the party would just bring along fire resistance. :smalltongue:

[Zaydos]

I think that if you're hoping that D&D moves away from dependence on magic items, Hit Points, and a class-based system, you're hoping in vain. These are things that are iconic to Dungeons and Dragons at this point. Even people who don't play D&D know what Hit Points and +1 Swords and Wizards are.

HP and classes I'll agree with you.

Magic items, excepting magic weapons they weren't required for the game math till 3.0, and even then usually not nearly as bland and "Item of X + Y"-y as 3.0. D&D could return to that, but I rather doubt it.

[Czin]

Wouldn't work; the party would just bring along fire resistance. :smalltongue:

Fine, it can breathe hellfire, which is unresistable and ignores immunities.

[Zaydos]

Fine, it can breathe hellfire, which is unresistable and ignores immunities.

Don't forget it's natural weapons are all ghost touch and it's immune to ability drain. Then throw in an ability to dispel magical flight.

[Kerrin]

HP is an abstraction of damage. Wounds and Vitality is a better abstraction. Trauma, limb damage and bleeding is bordering on a weak simulation.
It would be interesting to see how D&D, even 3.5, would play using a two-level abstraction, a'la the Hero system or Champions.

Of course, then players would want ways to bypass the first layer (aka Killing Damage), followed by a way to defend against that (aka Hardened), followed by... That's the thing that bothers me about Hero/Champions, it's rather cool there are so many ways to attack/defend but it makes for a lot of time required to understand, build characters, play, etc. The "toolbox" idea is really aluring, but it also gives me headaches.

[Czin]

Don't forget it's natural weapons are all ghost touch and it's immune to ability drain. Then throw in an ability to dispel magical flight.
Despite the high likelihood of sarcasm I'll respond any way.

As long as it's hellfire breath reaches out farther than someone can shoot with an arrow or spell, then flight isn't a problem. Giving it fullbody ghost touch and ability drain immunity would also be good. In addition, the tarrasque should be faster. There is no way you are convincing me that a 70 foot long 50 foot high monster with legs as long as those it's drawn as having has a base speed of 20 feet, a single step should carry it for more than 20 feet for pete's sake.

[true_shinken]

Also, only those who matter get healing surges. The player characters (who are not and should never ever be Joe Schmoe the commoner, this needs to die in fire and is badwrongandnotfun), and a few selected monsters who by using this make combat drag on (which should only be okay in a very few times).

Not true. Everyone gets at leats one healing surge. Second Wind is limited to players, though.
Once I had a DM claiming no one but players had healing surges (he was incorrect). It led to my bard being unable to heal anyone but player characters. Quite frustrating.

I don't. But I like commenting on it anyway, in memory of AD&D.

That smells like caring.

[grimbold]

5e's tarrasque must be able to breathe fire...why you ask? To render the horse/flying archers that are typically capable of rather easily beating it vulnerable to the beast.

i agree
the tarrasque should be more than CR 20 in 5th ed
before i read (Actually flipped through) the monster manual i thought the tarrasque was the highest CR creature possible
so when i want to use the tarrasque i use a random build off thei nternet that gives him CR 35
the 5th ed MM should come with tarrasque already CR 35

[Sine]

Despite the high likelihood of sarcasm I'll respond any way.

As long as it's hellfire breath reaches out farther than someone can shoot with an arrow or spell, then flight isn't a problem. Giving it fullbody ghost touch and ability drain immunity would also be good. In addition, the tarrasque should be faster. There is no way you are convincing me that a 70 foot long 50 foot high monster with legs as long as those it's drawn as having has a base speed of 20 feet, a single step should carry it for more than 20 feet for pete's sake.
Really slow metabolism? I kid, I kid. :smallwink:

In all seriousness, I'd rather 5e's Big T had an insane jump bonus and the ability to simply snatch flying PCs right out of the air than become yet another fire-breathing dragon aberration. Of course, he'd also need resistance/immunity to immobolizing effects to keep him interesting.

[Otodetu]

I feel that the 3.5 system with a healthy dose of splat and house-rules is a sort of 5th edition.

[Knaight]

More power to you, I rather stick with a simpler system with a level of abstraction personally:smallsmile:.

You can have a simpler system with a level of abstraction that still has actual injuries. I'll use the Threshold system for Fudge as an example, its very simple but nonetheless more realistic than HP. Injuries are based on how well people hit, which transfers directly to a penalty to all actions. If the hit exceeds a certain number, it kills the target. Simple, effective, more realistic than pure HP, and the design goals (ambushing and sniping are supposed to be highly effective) are met.

[MeeposFire]

5e's tarrasque must be able to breathe fire...why you ask? To render the horse/flying archers that are typically capable of rather easily beating it vulnerable to the beast.

Not required. The 4e Tarrasque has an aura that forces airborne threats to the ground. You will fight it on the ground.

[Thurbane]

I think that if you're hoping that D&D moves away from dependence on magic items, Hit Points, and a class-based system, you're hoping in vain. These are things that are iconic to Dungeons and Dragons at this point. Even people who don't play D&D know what Hit Points and +1 Swords and Wizards are.
Exactly...though some people will argue that all D&D needs to keep it's identity is, lieterally, dungeons, and dragons, there is much more than that to what makes D&D the iconic RPG that it is.

While many FRPGs have dragons and dungeons, none of them are D&D.

Fox hit's most of the nails on the head for myself.

[Psyren]

5e's tarrasque must be able to breathe fire...why you ask? To render the horse/flying archers that are typically capable of rather easily beating it vulnerable to the beast.

Too dragon-y. Make it a tremendous bellow (sonic cone), that also forces its targets items to make a fort-save or shatter if they're less than 60 ft. away.

(Also, it cancels lower-level silence effects.)

In fact, since it's a fort-save, you'll need Mettle rather than Evasion to beat it, as would make sense.